Pippa Heylings MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 16 Dec 2025 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is not only the VAT; the proposed hike in alcohol duty is yet another blow to pubs and breweries in my constituency. They include the Three Hills in Bartlow, which is reeling from a business rate increase of 123% as a result of the business rate valuation changes. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the Chancellor is failing to protect our pubs and breweries with these measures?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Water Scarcity · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. Along with many others, I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) on securing this important debate. Only last week here in Westminster Hall, I was highlighting the issue of water scarcity in my constituency in the context of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor. If we do not get this right, all those ambitious development plans will be dead in the water—or rather, dead in the lack of water. Our precious chalk streams, which the Liberal Democrats have been campaigning constantly to protect and are prioritised in the new environmental improvement plan, are already being degraded due to over-abstraction from the aquifers that sustain them. Far too many of them in my constituency now depend on artificial augmentation, which is when water is pumped from the boreholes into the headstreams just so that there is enough flow to sustain the wildlife within them. The fact that there is any flow at all is false. Sustainable water management must be the core principle that underpins growth across our region—as was said, it should be the backbone of our growth. How are we doing? The Cambridge Water and Anglian Water plans say that they can meet existing and future demand, but last year, the Environment Agency did not accept that. It withdrew its support for already approved development plans for 9,000 homes and the cancer hospital, pausing construction and lodging an objection because it said there is not enough water. Never mind existing water; these plans do not include the additional thousands of homes being proposed as part of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor. For example, the Fens reservoir, which we celebrate, will meet the already ambitious local plan for Greater Cambridge, but the thousands of homes planned by the Cambridge Growth Company are not included. We need to end the doublethink; growth plans and water-resource plans must be aligned from the start. That requires projected demand—how many additional houses are we actually talking about?—as well as handling both sides of the equation. First, we need to increase supply, potentially through more new reservoirs or infrastructure—the existing and planned reservoirs are not enough—and no more water should be abstracted from our chalk aquifers. Secondly, we should reduce demand by cutting leakage. As we have heard, in England, leakage stands at almost 50 litres per person a day. That dwarfs the potential savings from household behaviour change or efficiency measures in new builds. Alongside tackling leakage, as my hon. Friend said, we need changes to the permitted development rights to enable farmers to invest in farm reservoirs on their land. My central question to the Minister is this: who will be responsible for ensuring that plans for growth and plans for water resources are properly aligned in South Cambridgeshire and across the UK, and that action to increase supply and reduce demand is delivered? The current governance for water is fragmented, with multiple institutions producing plans that do not include new growth ambitions, and that is a failing of the regulator. People no longer trust water companies to act in the public interest. We Lib Dems welcome the intention to abolish Ofwat, but we continue to call for a truly independent water authority. Therefore, will the Minister join my calls for the Cambridge water scarcity group to be reconvened urgently, together with Lord Vallance and the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor team, to honestly address the mismatch between plans for growth and the measures needed to eliminate the water deficit, and for the water scarcity group—which brings together all the actors: the water companies, Ofwat, the Environment Agency, the planning services and the growth company—to continue to play a role, even if a development corporation comes forward?

• 3 Dec 2025 · Oxford to Cambridge Growth Corridor · Hansard source

  More

  I applaud the Government for confirming and recommitting to those new reservoirs. Will the Minister confirm that the Government understand that the new fens reservoir is enough only for the existing ambitions within the emerging local plan, not for the additional thousands of homes that are being considered by the new development corporation? We need to get the water scarcity group working together now to think about other options. Otherwise, water is a deal breaker.

• 3 Dec 2025 · Oxford to Cambridge Growth Corridor · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I thank my neighbour and colleague, the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner), for securing this important debate. Over the last 20 years our region has experienced unprecedented change and growth. According to the latest Office for National Statistics census analysis, the population of my constituency alone has risen by 21.6% since 2011—one of the fastest increases of any area outside of London. In what used to be a semi-rural constituency, schools, GP practices, hospitals, utilities and roads built for a much smaller population are now supporting tens of thousands more people than they were designed for and delivering well beyond their capacity—and the growth is not stopping. Local projections show that South Cambridgeshire’s numbers will increase the most out of all of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, expected to rise by 22.1% by 2031 and as much as 37.2% by 2041.

• 3 Dec 2025 · Oxford to Cambridge Growth Corridor · Hansard source

  More

  No, I will continue, if that is all right. Across Cambridgeshire almost 50,000 additional homes are forecast by 2041. The reason for this growth is that greater Cambridge, which constitutes the constituency of the hon. Member for Cambridge and mine of South Cambridgeshire, is one of the most economically dynamic regions of the country, with an annual turnover of £30 billion, employing more than 110,000 people. Although Cambridge is the brand, my constituency includes the largest biomedical campus in Europe. It is home to the global headquarters for AstraZeneca, the Addenbrooke’s, Rosie and Royal Papworth hospitals, and the Laboratory of Molecular Biology, whose researchers have won 12 Nobel prizes. We have the Wellcome Genome Campus, one of the world’s largest concentrations of genomics and biodata, and the Babraham Institute and Granta Park, home to the European headquarters of Illumina—I am just saying that a very small rural constituency is a great partner within the corridor. But with that, as we have heard, comes chronic underfunding, and under successive Governments growth has not kept pace with infrastructure. Take healthcare: the A&E department of Addenbrooke’s hospital was built to serve only a quarter of the patients it now sees, and the Cambridge University hospitals trust operates with a deficit of around 162 acute beds. The new acute strategy has been developed as a design, but there has not yet been any decision on a new A&E hospital. Transport tells the same story, as Members from across the Chamber have said. The appalling public transport options currently available and the commuting gridlock damages the quality of life of all residents. I join the east of England all-party parliamentary group and my hon. Friend the Member for Ely and East Cambridgeshire (Charlotte Cane) in calling for the Ely and Haughley junction to be improved to manage freight, to get lorries off the road and to enable more passenger trains. East West Rail purports to have resolved some of the transport connectivity issues across the corridor, but in my constituency it has been dogged by problems from the very start. There has been really poor community engagement, and nothing has been offered except huge infrastructure going through it. I repeat my invitation to the Rail Minister to come to my constituency to answer the questions of my constituents. The proposed Cambridge east station is in my constituency, not in Cambridge, so it would be very good to have the Minister there. This cannot just be about house building. The Greater Cambridge shared planning service has just won an award for being one of the best planning authorities in the country, because it does strategic planning and community engagement. Let us keep water and nature—the deal breakers in this—sustainable. Would the Minister convene with Lord Vallance to deliver joined-up infrastructure, together with all the relevant authorities?

• 25 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T9. Two weeks ago, when I asked the Government whether they had had discussions with the Cambridgeshire integrated care board on the 16,000-strong petition to save beds at the Arthur Rank hospice, I was informed that it would not be possible to provide a response within the usual time period. I have a simpler request today: will the Minister meet me and the new Central East integrated care board to discuss how to identify need and strategically commission beds?

• 25 Nov 2025 · COP30 · Hansard source

  More

  COP30 was the first climate summit since the world experienced a full year of global warming above 1.5°C. That is a stark reminder of the urgency we collectively face. At home, due to extreme weather, our farmers faced their worst harvest on record and lost billions in income from arable crops, while we saw devastating wildfires, doubling records, that wiped out national parks and local environments that are precious to everyone. These are the costs of inaction and climate breakdown here in the UK. I was proud to be part of a cross-party group of MPs who attended this COP and to carry with me the hopes of young people in South Cambridgeshire who sent me pictures, videos and poems. Freya, aged 11, wrote: “I don’t want to just inherit my future. I want to be able to shape the decisions and actions that others are taking on my behalf, because I am afraid.” I want to commend Brazil, the Secretary of State, the UK negotiating team and all those who worked tirelessly to keep the COP process alive, despite relentless attacks from climate denialism, delay and deception. The multilateral system is far from perfect, but it is the best alternative we have for global co-operation on climate change. There were positives: the pledges to cut methane; the recognition of the links between climate, nature and public health; the commitment to triple adaptation finance, which we know from Hurricane Melissa in Jamaica is absolutely critical; and the demonstration by business that the transition is an economic imperative and opportunity. The global climate action agenda is just so inspiring and has a massive impact, but we know that hope was not matched by delivery: there is still no credible plan to reduce the gap between current national commitments and the reductions needed to stay below 1.5°C; the refusal to reference fossil fuels and the transition away in the final text, despite it being the root cause of the crisis, was a staggering failure; and the Prime Minister’s unexpected and inexplicable decision not to support the Tropical Forests Forever Facility was really, really disturbing. This was what Brazil launched: an innovative investment facility to save tropical forests and give them a value while standing.

• 25 Nov 2025 · Immigration Reforms: Humanitarian Visa Routes · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Edward. I thank the hon. Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing this important debate on the potential impact of immigration reforms on humanitarian visa routes. I am here to speak up for the individuals and families in my constituency of South Cambridgeshire and across the country who arrived here in moments of crisis, conflict and persecution in search of safety, dignity and a chance to rebuild their lives through safe and legal humanitarian routes. My constituents from Ukraine, Afghanistan and Hong Kong arrived here via those routes, making huge life-changing decisions, fulfilling all the established requirements and believing that the UK would stand by its words, yet they now fear that those promises and the rules-based order is being ripped up from beneath them. To tell them, years after arrival—with many of them just one year away from fulfilling the five-year eligibility requirement for indefinite leave to remain—that the rules are changing is not only unjust; it undermines the very principle of humanitarian protection.

• 25 Nov 2025 · Immigration Reforms: Humanitarian Visa Routes · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for that. I want to turn to the punitive regimes that many of my constituents have fled in coming to this country through a fair system, and to speak principally about those constituents who are British nationals from Hong Kong. From 2021, Hongkongers were offered a humanitarian route to indefinite leave to remain in the UK. That reflected the UK’s historical and moral commitment to those people of Hong Kong who chose to retain their strong ties to the UK by taking up BNO status at the point of Hong Kong’s handover to China, following on from their previous British dependent territories citizenship. Rightly, in the wake of China’s national security law in 2020 and the breach of the Sino-British joint declaration, BNO visa holders were promised a clear and safe five-year route to settlement. Even then, that route was more restrictive than for other citizens of former British colonies. On behalf of the many BNO visa holders in South Cambridgeshire, I thank the Government for the important reassurance that they are exempt from the changes to the length of the route for ILR eligibility. The consultation launched by the Government, however, has introduced other areas of concern for those same BNO holders. I would like the Minister to clarify two points, because although the goalposts for length have not been moved, what constitutes a goal has changed. First, when the visa was created in 2021 there was no requirement to meet an earnings threshold. The BNO route is a family-based application and each family faces very different situations and conditions, and there are also different divisions of labour in those families. One constituent wrote to me—we know what it means when they write to us with their own stories and fears of transnational repression—about how her family came to the UK as retirees. Immediately, they faced punitive measures by the Chinese Government, who have made it impossible for them to keep their pension—

• 25 Nov 2025 · Immigration Reforms: Humanitarian Visa Routes · Hansard source

  More

  I have three questions on those mandatory requirements and minimum thresholds, which are in a way being applied retrospectively. First, will the minimum salary threshold for three to five years be applied retrospectively to BNO visa holders? Secondly, will the tax contribution requirement be applicable to all family members, including non-working dependants? Thirdly, on the change to the language requirement from B1 to B2, and given that some of my constituents have only one more year remaining, has the Minister assessed whether test centres, resources and staff are available? Would equivalence to B2 be accepted, such as someone having passed a university degree in the English language because Hong Kong was a British dependent territory when they got their degree?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. The UN Secretary General has warned that it is now inevitable that we will fail to keep global warming under 1.5°C, with the threat of devastating consequences, like the loss of the Amazon rainforest and its role in climate regulation. While the Conservatives and Reform continue to sabotage climate action, it is good to know that the Prime Minister will be going to COP30, but will the Foreign Secretary commit to making no further cuts to our international aid budget, so that we can contribute to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility fund?

• 27 Oct 2025 · North Sea Oil and Gas Industry · Hansard source

  More

  This is worrying news. Petrofac is one of the North sea’s largest offshore contractors, but it is entering administration today after years of financial difficulty. While I cannot share the desire of the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) to ditch the Climate Change Act 2008, I do share his concern for those 2,000 jobs in Scotland and those workers who face uncertainty about their future, so the Secretary of State must act swiftly to find a sustainable path forward, hopefully secure a buyer and safeguard those skilled jobs. This underlines why the Liberal Democrats have called for an independent just transition commission, putting oil and gas workers and local communities front and centre. It was good to see the much-awaited publication of the Government’s clean energy jobs plan last week. However, we know that job creation is not happening fast enough to keep up with job losses in the North sea, so can the Secretary of State and the Minister confirm what will be done to fill that gap in the meantime—in the short term—and to deliver a genuinely just transition that keeps those skilled workers powering Britain’s clean energy future?

• 22 Oct 2025 · Coal Tip Safety and New Extraction Licences · Hansard source

  More

  It was the leader of the Conservative party who made the pledge at COP26 to phase out coal extraction. Is the hon. Gentleman saying that the Conservatives would do a complete U-turn and restart coal extraction?

• 22 Oct 2025 · Coal Tip Safety and New Extraction Licences · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin (Ann Davies) on securing this important debate, which brings together two deeply interconnected issues: the safety of coal tips and the prohibition of new coal extraction licences. Both go to the heart of how we reckon with our industrial past, protect our communities in the present and deliver on our climate responsibilities for the future. In September last year, we hailed the historic moment that the UK closed its last coal-fired power station and we became the first country in the G7 to phase out coal power generation, fulfilling the pledge that we made alongside other countries at COP26. That was a key milestone in our climate targets and our efforts to reduce polluting emissions. At the same time, we paid tribute to the men and women who had worked in terrible conditions in our coalmines and coal-fired power stations for many years while they kept our lights on and powered our industries and economy. That now leaves, across the United Kingdom, about 5,000 disused coal tips, more than half of which are in Wales. Many of them sit close to the communities that once powered our country: the valleys, towns and villages built around the coal industry. As we have heard, as climate change accelerates, and rainfall and extreme weather events become more frequent, the danger the tips pose is growing. This is not a risk for some point in the future; it is happening now. This week we remember the tragedy in Aberfan in 1966, when 144 people, including 116 children, died. Just last year, 40 homes in Cwmtillery were evacuated when a tip collapse sent tonnes of slurry and debris through the village. These incidents are a reminder that this is not simply a historical concern, but a very real and present danger for communities today. Such tragedies should not be allowed to happen again. The Government’s commitment of £118 million over three years for coal tip safety, together with the Welsh Government’s £100 million investment, is of course welcome, but the Welsh Affairs Committee heard clearly that the funding only scratches the surface. The cost of long-term remediation and monitoring is so much higher, and the risks are increasing as the climate changes. Though the funding is welcome, it is reactive and not strategic. What we need is a strategic long-term plan—a proper partnership between the UK and Welsh Governments—with sustainable funding for the disused tips authority, which is due to be established in 2027. That body will succeed only if it has the skills, resources and the authority it needs from day one. As the Liberal Democrats have consistently said, we have to view this not just as a safety issue but as a climate resilience issue. Climate change is causing ground instability, which means that, as we have heard, living at the foot of a coal tip is becoming even more dangerous, year by year and day by day. The response must be integrated with the UK’s broader climate adaptation strategy. At the same time, we need to ensure we have truly confronted the unfinished business of coal itself. Liberal Democrats welcomed the Government’s announcement last November that they would prohibit new coal extraction licences, but that has to be a watertight ban. As it stands, there is a loophole that allows coal to be commercially extracted from disused tips, as we have just heard so powerfully. In practice, extracting coal from a tip is no different from open-cast mining. The method is the same, the disruption is the same, the risks are the same and the emissions are the same. The contradiction can be easily resolved. Leading environmental lawyers, working with the Coal Action Network, have proposed an amendment to the Coal Industry Act 1994 to clarify that the mining of coal from coal tips also requires a licence. That small change would ensure that the Government’s coal ban is comprehensive and future-proof. Future-proofing is vital, as changes in our political landscape could put all this at risk. There are political parties that would seek a very different route. Rather than invest in the new green jobs of the future, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), the leader of Reform UK, has demanded—I repeat, demanded—the reopening of coalmines in Wales. He argued that Welsh people would happily return to work down the pits—and, I assume, also have slurry tipped over the beautiful Welsh countryside. There is no vision for jobs of the future, only a return to the jobs of the past, and no concern for the planet that our children and future generations will inherit. Reform UK opposes green renewable energy. Instead, it wants to reopen coalmines and frack stupid frack, ripping apart our beautiful countryside by digging deep, with the threat of earth tremors, polluted water and devastation to our precious nature and wildlife.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Coal Tip Safety and New Extraction Licences · Hansard source

  More

  I definitely welcome that, and I hope that the Minister will ensure that we have the same powers in planning and all other legislation to follow that here in England. Reform UK, in true Trump style, would destroy our green and pleasant land—and for whom? It would make oil and gas giants richer while keeping our households and businesses stuck on volatile, skyrocketing energy bills and sending our young people back down the pits. The Liberal Democrats have been clear that there must be no new onshore fossil fuel extraction anywhere in the UK. This is the decisive moment to leave coal behind once and for all. We must have a just transition, with new investment, new skills and new opportunities rooted in the very same communities. That is why we are calling for an independent just transition commission to hold Government and industry to account, ensure that jobs in clean energy and green manufacturing reach the regions that need them most, and give workers the certainty that they deserve as industries evolve. I ask the Minister to agree with us that we should close the loophole and there should be no more new onshore fossil fuel extraction in the country.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Life Sciences Innovative Manufacturing Fund · Hansard source

  More

  It is my huge privilege to be the MP for South Cambridgeshire, which is home to Europe’s largest biomedical campus and the UK’s world-leading tech and life sciences sectors, and one of the largest contributors to the UK economy. The Liberal Democrats have long recognised that strategic investment in life sciences manufacturing is essential to our economic future and our national health security. Central to the delivery of the life sciences sector plan as part of the wider new industrial strategy, the life sciences innovative manufacturing fund is welcome and exactly the kind of targeted intervention the research and development sector has needed for a long time. While boosting economic opportunity, the fund also aims to increase the UK’s health resilience and ability to withstand and recover from health emergencies such as pandemics, long-term healthcare challenges and system shocks such as supply shock disruption.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Life Sciences Innovative Manufacturing Fund · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. Investment in the life science sector in the rural economy is critical, and that is why we are concerned that this motion comes at a time when our life science sector is in crisis—and, frankly, I am not hearing yet from the Minister that the Government are grasping the scale of the crisis. I have heard consistent concerns from the life science sector about this, with Novartis saying that the UK is becoming “largely uninvestable”. We have seen signs of this, and heard of it today, with the loss of planned investment by Merck MSD in life science and vaccination manufacturing facilities to the tune of £1 billion and also £450 million-worth of investment by AstraZeneca. That comes on top of AstraZeneca pausing the planned £200 million expansion of its research centre in my constituency. This is obviously ringing alarm bells across the Chamber. Additionally, in a report by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, “Delivering a voluntary scheme for health and growth”, life science leaders are warning that the Government growth plan will not succeed unless Ministers commit to fixing a scheme known as VPAG—the voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing, access and growth—which unexpectedly now requires companies to pay record clawback rates of up to a quarter or even a third of their revenue from sales of branded medicines to the NHS. The Liberal Democrats would commit to raising R&D spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2034, a decade-long commitment that gives businesses the certainty they are asking for. We would introduce proof of concept funding to help researchers develop their early-stage ideas and empower local authorities to develop regional spin-out ecosystems so innovation can drive growth and high paying jobs right across the country, as well as where I am in my constituency in the golden triangle. I therefore ask the Minister to set out, in addition to this much-awaited manufacturing fund, the status of the last-minute negotiations with companies and their investments, such as AstraZeneca and Merck MSD, and also what the Government are doing particularly on VPAG to restore confidence to pharmaceutical companies that the UK is a competitive place, attractive to investment, that values research, development and manufacturing.

• 21 Oct 2025 · Public-private Partnerships · Hansard source

  More

  I meet regularly with GPs in my constituency, and they have highlighted that they do not yet have clarity or certainty about the role and resources that they will have in the roll-out of services from hospitals to communities and neighbourhood health services. Will the Minister meet me to provide that clarity to our GPs and assure them that they will be at the table during that roll-out?

• 16 Oct 2025 · Children’s Hospices: South-east England · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend has brought forward a critical debate on children’s hospices. While we are looking at children’s hospices, let me say that this issue is also critical for adult hospices. In South Cambridgeshire, we have the fabulous Arthur Rank hospice, which at the moment is looking toward the cutting of its adult hospice beds. The outcry from constituents and members is huge. Does my hon. Friend agree that the ICBs could look at strategic commissioning of that care across both adult and children’s hospice beds?

• 16 Oct 2025 · Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 16 Oct 2025 · Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill · Hansard source

  More

  With the leave of the House, it only remains to say that we have heard, across the Chamber, impassioned and professional expertise. We have also heard about the importance of working together, not only in terms of multilateralism— [ Interruption. ] I hope that Members on the Conservative Front Bench are listening. We have also heard about the importance of working across the Chamber, on something that is so vital to all our constituents, our allies across the world and those in our overseas territories to finally fill the gap of the lawless part of the oceans through a global ocean governance that we can all agree on collectively. That will be hard. As hon. Members have heard, I have worked with artisanal and industrial fishermen and with researchers, scientists and conservationists. It is not, and it will not be, easy to come to an agreement about area-based management plans and the ocean sanctuaries and MPAs that we are looking to create, but we can do it if we all work together. I implore hon. Members, across all parties and Benches, that we get to ratification in a timely fashion so that we can be part of the new global ocean movement, sit at the table at the first global ocean COP and take a leading position going forward. We owe it to ourselves, to the children of everyone we know and to the future of the planet.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to speak in support of this Bill. This is a hugely important step that, as the Minister laid out, will finally allow the United Kingdom to ratify the high seas treaty and play its full part in protecting our shared global ocean. That is something that I hope Members across the Chamber will support. I share in congratulations to the Minister on keeping her word that she gave as shadow Minister. That is really good to see. The Bill comes at a crucial time. After more than a decade of negotiation, this treaty is one of the greatest biodiversity conservation victories in history. It is a landmark moment for global ocean governance, setting out for the first time a clear legal framework for establishing ocean sanctuaries and area-based management tools on the high seas, two-thirds of which lie beyond national borders and are therefore currently lawless. We refer to our rainforests as our planet’s lungs, but our oceans are just as important for biodiversity, regulating our climate, absorbing almost a third of human-made carbon dioxide, and sustaining billions of people around the world. As we have heard, they are also under extraordinary pressure from overfishing, plastic pollution and the growing threat of deep-sea mining. The treaty is currently the only viable pathway to meeting the global 30 by 30 biodiversity goal of protecting at least 30% of the world’s ocean before 2030. Currently, less than 1% of the high seas is fully protected, so time is running out to meet that goal by the end of the decade. I welcome the Bill, which provides the legal framework for the UK to deliver on the high seas treaty’s three central pillars: first, the fair sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources, the DNA and data of ocean life; secondly, the creation of marine protected areas and area-based management tools on the high seas; and thirdly, stronger environmental impact assessments to prevent harmful activities before they happen. This has to be fair for developing nations, and capacity building and technology transfer is central to that. This is personal to me. Before entering Parliament, I spent over a decade working professionally on the creation of marine protected areas in east Africa and South America. I helped to create the first ever multiple-use marine reserve, together with fishermen and Government in Zanzibar on Misali island. I then spent several years mediating conflict and reaching consensus between fishermen, tour operators, the Galapagos national park, and the Government, to help create the Galapagos marine reserve, which at that time was one of the largest MPAs created. Since then I have been involved in work towards international marine governance beyond national jurisdiction, the high seas treaty, as well as the UK’s Blue Belt programme, and I worked with communities and officials on all those overseas territories. I have seen at first hand what is at stake, from working with fishermen to prevent the destruction of coral reefs by dynamite fishing, to the terrifying news that we have reached the first climate tipping point, with our precious and beautiful warm-water coral reefs now in irreversible decline, putting at threat the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people. I have also mediated negotiations with the fishing sector on deep-water fishing to find sustainable fishing quotas and standards for tuna fishing, while protecting vital marine corridors for our endangered marine mammals and birds. I have dived along those, tagging whale sharks to understand the routes that they take across the high seas, beyond national jurisdictions. That is often the wild west, where we are facing the “tragedy of the commons”, and there are no agreed rules or governance to stop everyone in the race from taking as much as possible before someone else does. That is why it is so important to highlight that the global ocean treaty could provide a legal mechanism to address the “blue hole” in the south Atlantic—a region requiring agreements about what is sustainable fishing practice, and ways effectively to deter terribly unsustainable activity. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for a coherent ocean policy, and an ocean strategy that links the global commitments we make through the Bill to stronger domestic action on marine protection, sustainable fishing and pollution at home. The UK was instrumental in securing an ambitious treaty text at the UN, and we should take pride in that. However, as other Members have said, we must be honest: the UK was not among the first 60 nations to ratify that treaty, and that matters because where Britain leads, others follow. The commitments being made today must be matched with commitments to sustainable fisheries management and marine conservation back in our own waters. Our credibility and moral authority on the world stage is under threat when Ministers seem to say that we might not implement an outright ban on bottom trawling, despite pledging earlier this year to extend the ban on bottom-towed fishing gear to offshore protected areas. I was a member of the Environmental Audit Committee’s inquiry into marine governance, which recommended the ban on bottom trawling ahead of the UN ocean conference, and we commended the Government on their announcement at that time. I fully support the Committee Chair’s response, which repeats the Committee’s call to completely ban bottom trawling within offshore MPAs, and pleads with the Minister and the Government to take the right decision on the back of the consultation that is happening now, and not to undermine the integrity of our protected waters. In conclusion, the Liberal Democrats are clear: we support the Bill, and we urge the Government to bring forward ratification swiftly—I hope Members across the Chamber will support that—so that the UK has a seat at the table when Ocean COP1 takes place, and going forward.

• 14 Oct 2025 · COP30: Food System Transformation · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more. I have worked internationally for 20 years, and I have seen that when Britain leads, other countries follow. Our Climate Change Act was the first in the world, and 60 countries immediately followed it. Other countries followed the independent Climate Change Committee. I have seen emerging economies work with their Governments, looking at how they do economic development and leapfrogging by learning from us. When Britain leads, others follow, and that is why I ask the Minister to make sure we confirm that the Prime Minister will be at COP30, to show that we continue to lead from the front. I also ask the Minister to ensure that we sign up to the COP30 declaration on food systems and support all the work that has been done up until now to make sure that food systems are central to the climate change negotiations at Belém. I cannot emphasise more the impact, both here and across the world, of the U-turn—the turning of their back—of the Conservative Government, and Reform right now, on climate issues. I have worked alongside countries and communities ravaged by climate impacts that are waiting to see us take that leadership once again.

• 14 Oct 2025 · COP30: Food System Transformation · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely, and that is where the just transition must come in. We must make sure that this works at home. In fact, when we look at the amount of food being produced, we need to talk about nutritional security rather than food security. Finally, the UK must lead at COP30. Belém will be a turning point. Negotiations are already under way for a new COP declaration on food systems.

• 14 Oct 2025 · COP30: Food System Transformation · Hansard source

  More

  I will perhaps come back to that a little later, but I agree completely about the importance of the SPF, as well as the sustainable farming incentive. In my constituency of South Cambridgeshire, we have public land—council land—working on regenerative agriculture with farmers, to provide the food we need. We need the stability and certainty of the SFI for our farmers. The priorities it is anticipated will be negotiated at COP30 include deforestation-free supply chains, nature-positive farming, support for family farms and sustainable fisheries. This transformation has to be just, and that is as important here at home as it is globally. Farmers have always been on the frontline of climate change, as stewards of our countryside and producers of our food, and because they are struggling with the unavoidable impacts we now face. They must be at the heart of our solution. The Liberal Democrats have been clear that the transition to sustainable farming cannot be done to farmers; it must be done with them. However, progress has been slow, and the uncertainty surrounding the sustainable farming incentive risks undermining the confidence and stability that farmers need if they are to continue to invest in regenerative agriculture, local food networks and diversified protein crops, as proposed by the National Farmers Union. Improving soil health, supporting pollinators and keeping farm businesses viable makes business sense too. As Martin Lines—the chief executive of the Nature Friendly Farming Network, who farms in Cambridgeshire—says, nature-friendly farming plays a “vital role” in building resilience to weather extremes. He says: “Practices like improving soil health, using cover crops, and integrating habitats into fields are helping farmers stay productive while cutting back on inputs.” We also call for a just transition in food and farming, as does World Animal Protection. At home, we must match words with action. The Liberal Democrats would accelerate the delivery of the long-promised land use framework, aligning food, farming and biodiversity policy. We would protect and strengthen the sustainable farming incentive and deliver it now. We would support a just transition for farmers and animals, reduce food waste across the supply chain and champion local, sustainable food production to boost rural economies and resilience.